基于医院的混合虚拟医疗的患者和护理者体验:一项定性研究。

IF 6.7 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Journal of Australia Pub Date : 2024-12-08 DOI:10.5694/mja2.52520
Anna E Thompson, Tim Shaw, Shannon Nott, Andrew Wilson, Emily Saurman
{"title":"基于医院的混合虚拟医疗的患者和护理者体验:一项定性研究。","authors":"Anna E Thompson,&nbsp;Tim Shaw,&nbsp;Shannon Nott,&nbsp;Andrew Wilson,&nbsp;Emily Saurman","doi":"10.5694/mja2.52520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To understand patients’ and carers’ experiences of virtual medical care delivered into rural and remote hospitals.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Study design</h3>\n \n <p>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting, participants</h3>\n \n <p>Interviews were conducted between 7 June 2022 and 21 February 2023. Participants were people who had received a virtual medical service from the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS), and their carers, in rural and remote hospitals within the Western NSW Local Health District.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\n \n <p>Acceptability of, access to, quality of and appropriateness of care provided by the VRGS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We interviewed 43 patients and carers about their experiences of VRGS services received in an emergency department or inpatient setting. About half of our participants thought that virtual medical care (supported by in-person nursing staff) was highly acceptable and equivalent to in-person care. For the remaining participants, virtual care was seen as being an acceptable alternative if in-person care was not available. Patients reported that the model met their immediate needs, even if the virtual delivery mode was not their preference. VRGS doctors were generally seen as skilled and personable, and acceptability of virtual care increased with more experience of it. A key perceived benefit of virtual care was increased access to medical care without the need to travel long distances. Hospital-based virtual care was not considered less appropriate for older adults or children.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Virtual care in a rural hospital setting, such as that delivered by the VRGS, is broadly acceptable to patients and carers. While most would prefer to have a doctor physically present, patients and carers are accepting of the need for virtual care to supplement in-person care in rural and remote areas. Patients and carers who experience hospital-based virtual care perceive that it can provide good quality medical care and meet many of their needs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":"221 S11","pages":"S22-S27"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52520","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient and carer experiences of hospital-based hybrid virtual medical care: a qualitative study\",\"authors\":\"Anna E Thompson,&nbsp;Tim Shaw,&nbsp;Shannon Nott,&nbsp;Andrew Wilson,&nbsp;Emily Saurman\",\"doi\":\"10.5694/mja2.52520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To understand patients’ and carers’ experiences of virtual medical care delivered into rural and remote hospitals.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Study design</h3>\\n \\n <p>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Setting, participants</h3>\\n \\n <p>Interviews were conducted between 7 June 2022 and 21 February 2023. Participants were people who had received a virtual medical service from the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS), and their carers, in rural and remote hospitals within the Western NSW Local Health District.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\\n \\n <p>Acceptability of, access to, quality of and appropriateness of care provided by the VRGS.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We interviewed 43 patients and carers about their experiences of VRGS services received in an emergency department or inpatient setting. About half of our participants thought that virtual medical care (supported by in-person nursing staff) was highly acceptable and equivalent to in-person care. For the remaining participants, virtual care was seen as being an acceptable alternative if in-person care was not available. Patients reported that the model met their immediate needs, even if the virtual delivery mode was not their preference. VRGS doctors were generally seen as skilled and personable, and acceptability of virtual care increased with more experience of it. A key perceived benefit of virtual care was increased access to medical care without the need to travel long distances. Hospital-based virtual care was not considered less appropriate for older adults or children.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Virtual care in a rural hospital setting, such as that delivered by the VRGS, is broadly acceptable to patients and carers. While most would prefer to have a doctor physically present, patients and carers are accepting of the need for virtual care to supplement in-person care in rural and remote areas. Patients and carers who experience hospital-based virtual care perceive that it can provide good quality medical care and meet many of their needs.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\"221 S11\",\"pages\":\"S22-S27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52520\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52520\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52520","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:了解农村和偏远地区医院虚拟医疗服务的患者和护理人员体验。研究设计:采用半结构化访谈的定性研究。环境、参与者:访谈于2022年6月7日至2023年2月21日进行。参与者是在新南威尔士州西部地方卫生区内的农村和偏远医院接受过虚拟农村通才服务(VRGS)的虚拟医疗服务的人及其护理人员。主要结果测量:VRGS提供的护理的可接受性、可及性、质量和适当性。结果:我们采访了43名患者和护理人员,了解他们在急诊科或住院环境中接受VRGS服务的经历。大约一半的参与者认为虚拟医疗(由现场护理人员支持)是高度可接受的,相当于现场护理。对于其余的参与者,如果没有面对面的护理,虚拟护理被视为一种可接受的替代方案。患者报告说,该模型满足了他们的直接需求,即使虚拟交付模式不是他们的偏好。VRGS医生通常被认为是熟练和风度翩翩的,虚拟护理的可接受性随着经验的增加而增加。人们认为虚拟医疗的一个主要好处是增加了获得医疗服务的机会,而无需长途跋涉。以医院为基础的虚拟护理并不被认为不适合老年人或儿童。结论:农村医院环境中的虚拟护理,如VRGS提供的虚拟护理,被患者和护理人员广泛接受。虽然大多数人更希望有医生在场,但在农村和偏远地区,患者和护理人员接受了虚拟护理的需要,以补充面对面的护理。体验基于医院的虚拟医疗的患者和护理人员认为,它可以提供高质量的医疗服务,并满足他们的许多需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Patient and carer experiences of hospital-based hybrid virtual medical care: a qualitative study

Objectives

To understand patients’ and carers’ experiences of virtual medical care delivered into rural and remote hospitals.

Study design

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.

Setting, participants

Interviews were conducted between 7 June 2022 and 21 February 2023. Participants were people who had received a virtual medical service from the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS), and their carers, in rural and remote hospitals within the Western NSW Local Health District.

Main outcome measures

Acceptability of, access to, quality of and appropriateness of care provided by the VRGS.

Results

We interviewed 43 patients and carers about their experiences of VRGS services received in an emergency department or inpatient setting. About half of our participants thought that virtual medical care (supported by in-person nursing staff) was highly acceptable and equivalent to in-person care. For the remaining participants, virtual care was seen as being an acceptable alternative if in-person care was not available. Patients reported that the model met their immediate needs, even if the virtual delivery mode was not their preference. VRGS doctors were generally seen as skilled and personable, and acceptability of virtual care increased with more experience of it. A key perceived benefit of virtual care was increased access to medical care without the need to travel long distances. Hospital-based virtual care was not considered less appropriate for older adults or children.

Conclusions

Virtual care in a rural hospital setting, such as that delivered by the VRGS, is broadly acceptable to patients and carers. While most would prefer to have a doctor physically present, patients and carers are accepting of the need for virtual care to supplement in-person care in rural and remote areas. Patients and carers who experience hospital-based virtual care perceive that it can provide good quality medical care and meet many of their needs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
期刊最新文献
Consensus recommendations on multiple sclerosis management in Australia and New Zealand: part 1. Consensus recommendations on multiple sclerosis management in Australia and New Zealand: part 2. Potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisations with cardiovascular disease of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, Queensland, 2013-2017: a retrospective cohort study. Use of ChatGPT to obtain health information in Australia, 2024: insights from a nationally representative survey. Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1